A question to modders and scenario designers

[ASW Jedi]

Are mods and scenarios that are created by the public considered intellectual property? I ask this because what would prevent the DoD from using them for their own training. Since their are so many scenarios out there with many of them plausable why should the military go through the trouble of writing their own?

STG2(SW/SS) USNR

[Dr.Sid]

I guess they are .. but that can of course depend no the country where you live.

[SeaQueen]

Since their are so many scenarios out there with many of them plausable why should the military go through the trouble of writing their own?


There have been Harpoon scenarios that have been used by the military. A guy I know said they used Harpoon at the Naval War College. I know the Australians also use it.

There are a lot of good scenarios for all wargames out there made by knowledgable people. The problem is that there's also a lot of scenarios out there that aren't plausible for various reasons or else have some other problems with them and who wants to sort through them all to find those which you might find useful?

My experience with military wargames has been that they usually create a scenario with a specific problem in mind as an exercise for decision makers. With that in mind, it's easier to just pay someone to make a scenario that does exactly what you want it to do than MAYBE find something out there you could use. It might not save any money, lord knows analysts aren't cheap, but the convenience of having something that represents exactly what you want, based on the latest intelligence working exactly the way things are supposed to, rather than something you just happened to find, is worth paying for.

[ASW Jedi]

I am inclined to agree Sea Queen but I just want to get a feel for how the community views using their scenarios for government use. A scenario written for the Taiwan straits may not meet all the objectives for training/evaluation but it could be changed to meet them (i.e. Seawolf changed to a 688i).

[Molon Labe]

I'm no expert in IP law, but I think that the way it works is that the IP owner (SCS) of the original work (DW) also owns the IP rights to derivative works (possibly including mods and missions). Lead Pursuit, for example, appropriated the work of many Falcon 4 modders as its own once it acquired the IP rights to Falcon--and it appears to have been legal.

But, since SCS has a healthy relationship with the DoD, I wouldn't be too worried about this allocation of rights to end up harming the DoD. And considering that the DoD gets the "real" database and has access to the same mission editor we do (if not a better one), I doubt there's much we make that they can't at least equal.

[SeaQueen]

I wouldn't mind having mine used so long as I could bill hours for it. I don't give the navy my services for free. That's how I make a living.

I am inclined to agree Sea Queen but I just want to get a feel for how the community views using their scenarios for government use. A scenario written for the Taiwan straits may not meet all the objectives for training/evaluation but it could be changed to meet them (i.e. Seawolf changed to a 688i).

[Enigma]

Im working on campaigns involving both North Korea and Iran, if any dept. of Navy bean counter is watching and wants to send me a bazillion gillion dollars. :yep:

[LuftWolf]

I'm no expert in IP law, but I think that the way it works is that the IP owner (SCS) of the original work (DW) also owns the IP rights to derivative works (possibly including mods and missions). Lead Pursuit, for example, appropriated the work of many Falcon 4 modders as its own once it acquired the IP rights to Falcon--and it appears to have been legal.

But, since SCS has a healthy relationship with the DoD, I wouldn't be too worried about this allocation of rights to end up harming the DoD. And considering that the DoD gets the "real" database and has access to the same mission editor we do (if not a better one), I doubt there's much we make that they can't at least equal.

I'd rather not think that SCS could just take everything I've done and throw it on a disk without asking me.

Actually, it's been just the opposite, they insist their lawyers don't want them to get involved too much with distributing community generated materials (even missions and such, think tutorials and walkthroughs...). This is a feature of their primary mission as a defense contractor, which necessitates they act especially conservative in a lot cases (especially those that might complicate multimillion dollar contracts with what is basically a hobby side project).

My guess is that Lead Pursuit simply didn't feel their community would sue them, and once they had the goods and the new F4.0, it didn't matter if they all jumped ship. Sad, but probably a good business decision (as is SCS's for that matter).

In regards to the IP status of user created missions and mods for DW vis-a-vis the DoD, I wouldn't worry too much, the contract version of DW comes as part of a toolkit that include proprietary mission and database design tools, as well as an expanded NavalSimEngine core and interface modules. More or less, it's a whole different piece of software with much more end-user capability.

Cheers,
David

[XabbaRus]

Ok this brings an interesting question.

you know all those addons you can get for IL-2 Forgotten Battles. They are just huge campaigns made using the editor with a bunch of new skins in them, but you have to pay for them.

What would stop you making an uber campaign or set of tehm for DW and tehn charge for them.

I personally think it is wrong and never could figure out the deal with IL-2 FB and teh payware extra campaigns. Could someone enlighten me?

[Molon Labe]

I'm no expert in IP law, but I think that the way it works is that the IP owner (SCS) of the original work (DW) also owns the IP rights to derivative works (possibly including mods and missions). Lead Pursuit, for example, appropriated the work of many Falcon 4 modders as its own once it acquired the IP rights to Falcon--and it appears to have been legal.

But, since SCS has a healthy relationship with the DoD, I wouldn't be too worried about this allocation of rights to end up harming the DoD. And considering that the DoD gets the "real" database and has access to the same mission editor we do (if not a better one), I doubt there's much we make that they can't at least equal.
I'd rather not think that SCS could just take everything I've done and throw it on a disk without asking me.

Actually, it's been just the opposite, they insist their lawyers don't want them to get involved too much with distributing community generated materials (even missions and such, think tutorials and walkthroughs...). This is a feature of their primary mission as a defense contractor, which necessitates they act especially conservative in a lot cases (especially those that might complicate multimillion dollar contracts with what is basically a hobby side project).

My guess is that Lead Pursuit simply didn't feel their community would sue them, and once they had the goods and the new F4.0, it didn't matter if they all jumped ship. Sad, but probably a good business decision (as is SCS's for that matter).

In regards to the IP status of user created missions and mods for DW vis-a-vis the DoD, I wouldn't worry too much, the contract version of DW comes as part of a toolkit that include proprietary mission and database design tools, as well as an expanded NavalSimEngine core and interface modules. More or less, it's a whole different piece of software with much more end-user capability.

Cheers,
David

I'm not sure if LP actually ended up in court or not. Both sides did secure representation and had some heated exhanges though. I have a hard time believing that LP could have gotten away with what they did unless it was in fact legal. And I'm sure that at least to some extent, people with original IP rights also own the rights to modifications of the original...what I'm not sure of are the nuances of how scenarios and DB/Doctrine mods fit into the legal "boxes." (I'm sure I can find someone here who does if you're interested.)

[Dr.Sid]

IL2 addons all had new playable aircraft (many new) and hell it was not just a paintjob. Ususally there was minor or even major game engine modifications. It was worth the money, I'd say. Or at least I haven't seens any 'paintjobs and missions' on sale anywhere, I'm talking about ACE expansion, forgotten battles, pacific fighters ..

[XabbaRus]

Dr Sid I'm not reffering to Aces over Europe addon or Pacific Fighters, I am talking about Fall Blau, Operation Barborossa.

They were user made and then sold on a CD with a nice cover and artwork. They added paint jobs but not new aircraft. IL-2 FB isn't that mod friendly.

[karldonitz]

someone speaks German?

[Wim Libaers]

I'm not sure if LP actually ended up in court or not. Both sides did secure representation and had some heated exhanges though. I have a hard time believing that LP could have gotten away with what they did unless it was in fact legal. And I'm sure that at least to some extent, people with original IP rights also own the rights to modifications of the original...what I'm not sure of are the nuances of how scenarios and DB/Doctrine mods fit into the legal "boxes." (I'm sure I can find someone here who does if you're interested.)

Do you really think something that you make would be owned by a software company just because it was made with their product? Then Microsoft would be the owner of every Word document ever written ;)

Of course, some games explicitly mention that all mods made for the game will be the property of the game publisher. However, this may not be legally binding. It also depends on where you live, as in some countries some aspects of copyright simply cannot be assigned to others.

[Molon Labe]

I'm not sure if LP actually ended up in court or not. Both sides did secure representation and had some heated exhanges though. I have a hard time believing that LP could have gotten away with what they did unless it was in fact legal. And I'm sure that at least to some extent, people with original IP rights also own the rights to modifications of the original...what I'm not sure of are the nuances of how scenarios and DB/Doctrine mods fit into the legal "boxes." (I'm sure I can find someone here who does if you're interested.)
Do you really think something that you make would be owned by a software company just because it was made with their product? Then Microsoft would be the owner of every Word document ever written ;)

Of course, some games explicitly mention that all mods made for the game will be the property of the game publisher. However, this may not be legally binding. It also depends on where you live, as in some countries some aspects of copyright simply cannot be assigned to others.

Mods aren't made with the product. They are an alteration of the product.

[LuftWolf]

Lead Pursuit must have had something in their EULA that stated something to the effect that any modifications to files distributed with F4.0 or files created for use with F4.0 that are openly distributed become the property of LP.

I can tell you guys, in all honesty, that this is NOT the case with SCS, so I wouldn't worry about Jamie ganking any of our work and telling us "tough". :lol:

Cheers,
David

[Molon Labe]

Lead Pursuit must have had something in their EULA that stated something to the effect that any modifications to files distributed with F4.0 or files created for use with F4.0 that are openly distributed become the property of LP.

I can tell you guys, in all honesty, that this is NOT the case with SCS, so I wouldn't worry about Jamie ganking any of our work and telling us "tough". :lol:

Cheers,
David
I wouldn't worry about it either. Jamie's not LP. :p
And it would have been MicroProse's EULA.

[LuftWolf]

MicroProse is still around? Wow. :sunny:

Cheers,
David

Edit: Nope I just googled it, Atari closed them down in 2003... sad.

[kage]

I'm not sure if LP actually ended up in court or not. Both sides did secure representation and had some heated exhanges though. I have a hard time believing that LP could have gotten away with what they did unless it was in fact legal. And I'm sure that at least to some extent, people with original IP rights also own the rights to modifications of the original...what I'm not sure of are the nuances of how scenarios and DB/Doctrine mods fit into the legal "boxes." (I'm sure I can find someone here who does if you're interested.)

IANAL, but...

A mod is, by its very nature, an extension to a product. Therefore, the mod is useless without the product. If the product were to be withheld for whatever reason (e.g. embargo) then the mod is essentially worthless.

The mod does, however, represent a separate piece of work, and can even be sold separately. There is a minefield of exceptions, though. If there is an agreement in place between product maker and modder, that agreement may 'transfer/steal/whatever' the rights - if the laws that govern it allows such a thing.
(The best word to use depends on the viewpoint of the speaker.)

Think about e.g. car mods - sold more or less separately, (some not legal to use, but that's another story) and not at all controlled by the car makers. Some of the practices nearly assumed in the thread above, would extend this analogy as follows: "The car companies have the right to raid the car-mod makers and confiscate all their wares, manufacturing equipment, blueprints, and so on, and then make&sell the stuff themselves." However, they are in their rights to duplicate the modders works to achieve the same effect (barring patents) and (optionally) include it in the new version of the original product, but that assumes they do put a bit of work of their own into it.

Or they can ask nicely :D
(While LW would be upset if they did it without asking, I wouldn't be surprised if he'd jump at the opportunity to provide "the new stock db". In his position, I would.)

This is my understanding of it, anyway; as I said, IANAL. (I Am Not A Lawyer)

[udadni]

Personally, I wouldn't be too concerned about the Navy using our scenarios for training for the same reason the LWAMI documentation recommends using scenarios specifically created for LWAMI: the modeling of the performance of sonar and other gear in DW isn't exactly 100% accurate, and probably on purpose. If they were going to use a mission we'd made, it would take half as long as it took to make the mission to make it conform to real world parameters.